Jack Johnson
Jack Dempsey
Max Baer
15 rounds (not that that will come into play in some cases
8 ounce gloves.
What happens?
Whaddaya mean, "some?"yancey wrote:James J Jeffries
Jack Johnson
Jack Dempsey
Max Baer
15 rounds (not that that will come into play in some casesDD )
8 ounce gloves.
What happens?
He is nowhere near as mobile as the Young who faced a past-prime (though, obviously, still dangerous) Foreman. Johnson essentially fought flat-footed, & used his size & strength advantages to mount an offense in picking away the punches of his opponents --- size & strength advantages which simply would not be there in this fight, & unlike so many of Johnson's contemporaries, Foreman fought at an up-tempo & punched in combination. Look at how many of Johnson's foes threw two or three punches & then stopped dead. Some of them feared the return-fire of a bigger man, with a solid punch --- Foreman would not fear Johnson, nor would he respect his guard. Did you really mean to bring up Jeffries? Six years of inactivity & 100lbs. of shed weight, with no tune-up bout Jeffries!? Guess what a peak Foreman makes of him? Jeffries would've been better off being put through a meat-grinder. That holds no weight in besting Foreman.dempseyfire wrote:So Johnson, who manhandled Ed Martin, Jeannette, McVey, Langford, Jefferies, Willard for 20 rounds . . can't get out of the way of George Foreman??
That makes zero sense. Johnson is an awful matchup for Foreman, all of the savvy and skill of Young but a much bigger stronger guy with a much harder punch. There is no way Foreman lasts 15 rounds vs Johnson.
You can't parry the punches of a bigger man? Says who? Byrd made a whole career out of it, and Kevin Johnson used a pedestrian parry defense to last 12 rounds with Vitali Klitschko. You just don't see many fighters parrying nowadays b/c it's not taught and it takes skill to utilize correctly.
George Foreman never fought fifteen rounds in his life & if it came to such a crunch against Jeffries, he'd not make it here.HomicideHenry wrote:Marciano and Dempsey both would of had a good chance against George, more so than Frazier did, mainly because when they bobbed and weaved they bent their knees, while Frazier bent down---thus getting caught flush on the chin by uppercuts. I think they would have the punchers chance at betaing Foreman, as do I think Baer would. The Baer/Foreman encounter would be alot like the Foreman/Lyle encounter imho.
As for Jeffries, I see him going the distance with Foreman. Who wins the decision, is anyone's guess. But Jeffries would and could match Foreman for size, power, and ability. Jeffries often said he retired because he was sick and tired of fighting smaller men, for Jeffries was practically a giant for the era.
Well they used to fight 25-30 rounds in those days often in the mid day heat. Johnson could be mobile when he wanted to,I have seen him be mobile in places, but knowing he may have to fight 25 rounds meant he very often didnt think it worthwhile to use those tactics hence the economy of movement. Do try and actually understand the different era of boxing Johnson competed in before you make your judge judy verdict on Johnson.Goodnight, Irene wrote:He is nowhere near as mobile as the Young who faced a past-prime (though, obviously, still dangerous) Foreman. Johnson essentially fought flat-footed, & used his size & strength advantages to mount an offense in picking away the punches of his opponents --- size & strength advantages which simply would not be there in this fight, & unlike so many of Johnson's contemporaries, Foreman fought at an up-tempo & punched in combination. Look at how many of Johnson's foes threw two or three punches & then stopped dead. Some of them feared the return-fire of a bigger man, with a solid punch --- Foreman would not fear Johnson, nor would he respect his guard. Did you really mean to bring up Jeffries? Six years of inactivity & 100lbs. of shed weight, with no tune-up bout Jeffries!? Guess what a peak Foreman makes of him? Jeffries would've been better off being put through a meat-grinder. That holds no weight in besting Foreman.dempseyfire wrote:So Johnson, who manhandled Ed Martin, Jeannette, McVey, Langford, Jefferies, Willard for 20 rounds . . can't get out of the way of George Foreman??
That makes zero sense. Johnson is an awful matchup for Foreman, all of the savvy and skill of Young but a much bigger stronger guy with a much harder punch. There is no way Foreman lasts 15 rounds vs Johnson.
You can't parry the punches of a bigger man? Says who? Byrd made a whole career out of it, and Kevin Johnson used a pedestrian parry defense to last 12 rounds with Vitali Klitschko. You just don't see many fighters parrying nowadays b/c it's not taught and it takes skill to utilize correctly.
Willard? Very big, strong guy, & Johnson was more than a little past his prime, for sure. However, Johnson failed to hurt Willard sufficiently as to keep him off --- & Willard was nowhere near as aggressive or capable a finisher as Foreman. His attack looks pedestrian by comparison, & it is. McVey, Jeanette & Langford were ducked in absolutely shameless fashion. It was appalling. How developed was McVey when Johnson fought him again? Unless Johnson is going to fight a Foreman still in High School, its weight in the discussion is suspect.
This idea that Johnson is going to emulate his defensive wizardry by standing flat-footed & parrying Foreman --- with an eye to actually winning --- cannot stand. Johnson had a punch & he can hurt Foreman, but he cannot KO him whilever Foreman is fresh. Foreman is just too tough for that, as the fight with Lyle exhibited. Is Johnson going to out-manoeuvre Foreman, as Young did? I highly doubt that --- Johnson was about economy of footwork, & making you miss while he was at close-range.
Foreman would cripple Johnson, IMO.
I agree Foreman wins..... I just dont see Johnson being crippled or the fight being easy. Johnson was versatile, and as tough as nails,a hard man in a hard era....my conclusion by no means is a Foreman win certain or as easy as you suggest.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.
12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.
Look at the full film available vs Ketchel, there are parts of the fight Johnson is bouncing around on his toes.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.
12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.
Ah yes it was the Ketchel fight, I couldn't remember as I used to have a video tape of Johnson from the marshall cavendish series. Johnson was a gifted and very very tough man. Way ahead of his time I think its fair to say.dempseyfire wrote:Look at the full film available vs Ketchel, there are parts of the fight Johnson is bouncing around on his toes.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.
12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.
In any case, to say guy who had incredible reflexes, awesome counter-punching abilities, could change angles in a split second, who was durable, had a great left jab, all who saw him marveled at his boxing skills, and you say a George Foreman "cripples" him . . that's going against everything we know of Johnson and is akin to saying that Sam Peter "cripples" Ali. It's just going against logic, Foreman by KO over struggling I could even live with, but Foreman is not going in and whitewashing Jack Johnson . . no-one ever did that and he would not be the first.
I don't think the fighter ever lived who could "cripple" Jack Johnson. Beatable? Yes. Overrated? In my judgment, yes. But still a great heavyweight champion, and not likely to be "crippled" by anyone.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.
12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.
The late great Harry Carpenter rated Johnson very very highly most knowledgable boxing historians do.raylawpc wrote:I don't think the fighter ever lived who could "cripple" Jack Johnson. Beatable? Yes. Overrated? In my judgment, yes. But still a great heavyweight champion, and not likely to be "crippled" by anyone.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Obviously, that is a potential factor --- but it is potential only. Why? While Johnson's conditions were significant, it doesn't mean you can just blindly attribute this dancing style to him either, since we never saw it.
12 rounds, 25 rounds, 12 ounce gloves, 2 ounce gloves, midday, midnight...Foreman cripples Johnson.